IQ and Atypical Autism

Post Reply New Topic

Savant syndrome can occur at any IQ; in fact, it occurs most with mental retardation (at least as measured by IQ--as usual I am skeptical about the autistic ones' IQs being measured properly, or relevant even if measured properly.) People with savant skills and a normal-plus IQ are very rare.

That's the definition of savant syndrome--someone who has a skill that's far above everything else he can do, and far above what most people can do. You can learn to do rapid math, you can learn to draw perfectly; but a savant who's talented in those areas will have those skills naturally. It seems it happens more often in people with some kind of brain damage, maybe from epilepsy or a head injury, and the resulting reconfiguration makes a brain that's very specialized in some skill or other.

130 is high, yeah. Not really anything unusual, but relatively high. You're probably one of a few thousand in your city who are that good at solving puzzles. It does matter how you use it. I remember from one of the other IQ threads that Richard Feynman was somewhere in the 120s--which would mean either skills not measured by the IQ test (and there are a lot of them) or unusual creativity, focus, and dedication. People in the 120 or more range (above average) are capable, theoretically, and given the specific talents for those areas, of doing any job on the planet, from janitor to astrophysicist. They often don't, simply because IQ is not all there is to it, and because most people would simply not be happy doing astrophysics.

It's better than average, so consider yourself lucky. The majority of people I know have an IQ somewhere around 105...
Mine, if I remember correctly is either 160 or 165, but IQ means nothing. It merely gauges how well you can comprehend and retain information. If you have an IQ of, say, 180, but do nothing with it, then you aren't a very smart person. It's all relative to who you are, but yes I'd say 130 is pretty damn good.

. Wow! You are very smart (and cute,lol) I try to utilize my intelligence everyday to its fullest!

Heh, thanks.
That's very good. It saddens me when intelligent people make nothing of there talents.

You guy's understand there isn't just one IQ test?

A score of 130 on one may be 100 on another.. you can't compare apples to oranges.

I took one the other day (while medicated on Cannabis like always) and I scored 130 at highsociety.org which placed me in the 95th percentile. I've seen scores from 110-160 from various sites. I also score very high on EIQ tests with the exception that I don't have a sophisticated vocabulary. You learns words through education; they have nothing to do with intelligence.

On the IQ test I struggle with pattern recognition despite being very well at finding "relationships" between concepts and ideas. I have LDD as a result of a sensory different and because of this I am an auditory learner. I also have hyperlexia so maybe that is what gives me troubles with the patterns. The patterns on the test are nothing like what is found in nature.

95th percentile. However do not think that having a high IQ is a mark of genius. All it says is that you catch onto to abstractions well. It is no measure of creativity.

ruveyn

That is a really ignorant statement. You're making the assumption that IQ is the only thing that matters to a person's success. you're also making the assumption that Aspergers is the only problem the individual may have. Some people like myself may be really good at noticing patterns, solving problems, ect. It does nothing to overcome auditory processing problems, coordination issues, and other non-verbal learning disorders. In a way I'm fully aware that you feel threatened by me saying that I have a 190 IQ, so I understand your attempt to rationalize my intelligence with a negative perception. Ignorant, but I understand it none the less.



It saddens me when ignorant people derive sweeping generalizations about something they know very little about. Considering that a significant portion of the Aspergers community have normal to above average IQs I'm sure they wouldn't appreciate you making the assumption that they are somehow wasting their potential.



Are you saying that it doesn't take at least some measure of intelligence to remember and properly utilize a large vocabulary?



It is in my opinion that IQ tests simply evaluates a small portion of intelligence. That is the point I am trying to make. How relevant are these tests if they each give a different number that has an arbitrary number associated with your "intelligence". Isn't memory an important part of intelligence but the test really doesn't test you on that. I know people with low IQs that have a vast wealth of information in their head. They can tell you everything about a given subject they specialize in. One person I know has a 90 IQ yet his memory is amazing. Creativity is also an important part of intelligence but does it test you for that?



I hope that you are not implying that people who catch unto abstractions are uncreative people. It would be more logical to assume that yes there are people who are good at abstractions but haven't an ounce of creativity, BUT there are also people who have some degree of both, and yet others who have a high degree of BOTH. IQ usually does have at least some correlation of success, however its not a 1 to 1 probability. Take away my learning disabilities (mostly auditory processing) and I would be more like my uncle who works for NASA and my other relative who works as a nuclear engineer for the military. You can tell me how rare my IQ is all you want, but NASA employees are also rare. Think about that.

I know tht there is more than onr iq test, because psychology is one of my obsessive interests. It is possible that I scored so high because half of the stuff on there have been an obsessive interest for me

People who have an easy time with the abstract might or might no be creative. There is no hard relation between creativity/originality and ease of handling abstractions.

ruveyn

What type of assessment did you have to measure an IQ at a level placing you, at least theoretically, in Earth's Top 100? It would have to be a very specialised instrument to be able to discriminate accurately at such uncommon levels.

There are many IQ tests, and many different scales. Some reach well into the 200s; numbers are meaningless without knowing the test and scale used, and the weaknesses inherent in that specific test.


M.

Where do you get numbers like that about the rarity of IQs?

When I was last tested, my "number" came in at 159.

(roughly a Z-score of 3.75 standard deviations above the mean
on my IQ test. I majored in sociology, minored in psychology,
and had to take a course in basic statistics as part of my education--
that's why I can tell you something about the meaning of my IQ
score.)

Depending on which sort of IQ test is used, 15 or 16 IQ points=
1 standard deviation above or below 100, the standard and
standardized mean score on an IQ test. So your 130 score
would be at the high end of the normal range of intelligence
(read "inside the ball park").

Whismi-Cal, I agree, I agree.

I didn't bookmark the source page unfortunately. However, here's one very similar.
http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/IQtable.aspx